I have a lot of sources in regards to as to what’s going on with the president and the administration and so on, and every one of my sources said it was a false flag”–Paul Preston

Paul Preston

Sofia Smallstorm, who produced and directed the documentary, “Unraveling Sandy Hook”, which many regard as the best video study of the Sandy Hook event, recently interviewed a Los Angeles school expert, Paul Preston, about Sandy Hook and his knowledge of what had transpired.

Governor Malloy had held a press conference that day, explaining that he and the Lt. Governor had been “spoken to” that something like this might happen, which raised the question, what “something like this” did he mean? Had he been told a school shooting massacre would take place? or a drill that would be presented as a real event, which appears to be what took place?

Remarkably, we now have confirmation from an unexpected source. Paul Preston had obtained information from officials in the U.S. Department of Education of the Barack Obama administration, who confirmed to him on the basis of their own personal knowledge that:

(1) it had been a drill;

(2) no children had been killed; and,

(3) it had been done to promote an anti-gun agenda.

Given his background of 41 years in the California public school system (from custodian to district superintendent) and having served as a teacher, coach, vice-principal and principal before retiring in 2012 as the superintendent of two charter schools, I thought what he had to say about Sandy Hook deserved widespread dissemination.

So when I did a two-hour show on Revolution Radio, “False Flags (9/11, Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing)” on 30 May 2014, as the third segment, I included the second 30-minutes of Sofia’s interview with Paul Preston, which is archived on “The Real Deal” and can be heard here:
Because Preston is also highly trained in school safety issues and had himself organized drills of many kinds, including active-shooter drills, what he has to say is especially telling. He has a website of his own at www.Agenda21Radio.com, which he created to alert listeners to the peirls Agenda 21.

S – Welcome back everyone to the Speed of Light on the Pure Momemtum Network. This is Sofia Smallstorm and we’re listening to a very interesting discussion – Paul Preston, school principal, school safety consultant, teacher, coach, and superintendent. He has been in the California system for 41 years. He is now retired.

So Paul, let’s continue. Can we get a little bit into Sandy Hook now and what set off your antenna about it?

P – Well, you know I’ve been involved in many many situations at schools that have been, you know, emergency type situations and was involved even to some degree with the Columbine situation in that we had an individual who as trying to blow up the school, our school, at the time. In a similar fashion to what was a predicted bomb threat that occurred at Columbine thee days before the Columbine shooting, and that’s how we kind of got in touch with the Columbine people. They got in touch with us because it turned out to be a similar neo-Nazi group that was related to the Trench Coat Mafia, of all people.

And so learning and watching ad seeing all these incidences play out, all these school shootings, I took an enormous interest in because we were doing a study trying to determine because the neo-Nazis we had been working with in our school along the same time of the Columbine incident were telling us that there was going to be some big event take place. And so our staff, myself, we all wanted to sit down and figure where this was all going to and we studied a lot of the Nazi websites and so on, and we figured out that yes, something big was going to happen.

Well then Caolumbine happened. So we watched with a lot of intensity and under with my own circumstances and also with watching the videos and replays of the other active shooter situations, I became sort of a specialist in that and applied it to my own active-shooter training that I was doing and conducting with my own people.

S – Right. And now can we get in to Sandy Hook?

P – Well yes. Of all the hundreds of hours that I spent watching these scenarios and investigating and reporting on them on my radio show, the first thing I noticed when I heard about Sandy Hook when I turned on the TV like everybody else – now I have always told everybody when you’re seeing these things play out in real time, the best news reporting is what’s happening in real time – that day of, you know, the moments that are around the incident. But document for yourself what’s going on because you’ll never see it again.

And the first thing that caught my eye as I was watching everything play out was the lack of intensity with which people were moving and that really disturbed me. It hit me within the first few minutes, watching the video, the helicopters flying around and so on. Things just didn’t seem to be right, like I would always understand in an incident command system. People weren’t rushing around. People weren’t panicking. They ran that one guy off into the woods and then they arrested him. They took him away and there was no connectedness to that.

I was also wondering why all the emergency equipment wasn’t around the school. And I didn’t see any students either and that really bothered me.

S – So, it was almost like too slow motion for a real event. Not enough panic. Not enough chaos. You had mentioned chaos earlier being a part of these real situations. And a lot of support people rushing around like press and police but not running fast enough, not running with intensity and alarm and panic and concern, I think.

P – None of that was there.

S – Yes. So all right, and then what did you start thinking?

P – Well, just within the first 10 or 15 minutes, it just all looked too staged to me, and I know about staging these things since I’ve staged a number of them. And, like I said, then you stage something there’s a complete lack of intensity as you would have in a real scenario when there’s panic really taking hold of people and they’re really afraid and they’re screaming and yelling and so on.

YouTube – Veterans Today –

But the one thing that really bothered me was where were the kids. You know they had how many hundreds of kids there at the school. I didn’t see them.

S – Right

P – And there was lack of accounting for them.

And right away – and I’ll juxtaposition this with the situation that happened in Pennsylvania. You saw the kids right away. I know it’s a high school, but you know, you saw the kids right away and you saw their plan of evacuation of the school unfolding.

Now this is where it really falls apart with Sandy Hook for me. I saw… I saw no evidence of a real plan of student evacuation taking place. And that stuck to my head like crazy when I was in the moments watching this whole thing play out in real time.

S – That’s very interesting. No evidence of a real plan. Because only someone… I mean everybody had their own response to it. Some of us were already clued in from previous kinds of situations. All this has got to be not what they’re telling us it is. But you come from the industry, the business, and you felt that there is… I would say you knew… It probably was not even a feeling. It was like, you know, set in stone in your head. Where’s the plan? I don’t see the plan playing itself out. Right?

P – I saw same of your evacuation centers and I saw some of your colored tarps on the ground, the colored taps and so on, but even that pretty odd because normally if you have the tarps out there…in every active shooter situation you have ever see, there’s somebody on the tarp or there’s been some help that’s been given to somebody when somebody has been wounded, but none of that was even evident. And I don’t see anybody trying to rush to anybody’s help at all in a mass casualty situation.

See, when you don’t see that…I mean…I’ll go back to the example that I have before about the 13 who overdosed. We had people everywhere, and we had people everywhere until everybody was safe, which was 35, 40 minutes, almost an hour. And that was never happening there at Sandy Hook. You didn’t see the mass of people doing that.

S – Yes, it’s more like the press filled in for that missing element. The press sounded more concerned and panicked on TV as they reported but the actual participants were not so… And we got, you know, long after the fact we got the supposed 911 calls, we got various people giving their versions of it on television as they got interviewed. But we didn’t see it on the ground. And so how long did you watch it for? Over a period of days, weeks? And what were your thoughts?

YouTube – Veterans Today –

P – You know, I make it a study. I study these things intensely, and what really, what really put me over the top was the next morning with Robbie Parker going out there, and I saw that clip as it happened. And I said there’s something really wrong here.

And that’s when I started thinking about the… the actors. You can actually rent these actors out. In fact that put these things up for training all the time.

And I just said ‘this is not… first of all, his demeanor was terrible. I would never go out…and I know sometimes this happens but… to send a parent out to talk to the press in that fashion about the daughter that he just lost. None of that seemed to be appropriate. None of it seemed to fit. And his behavior with the smiling laughing thing and getting into character that you could see. I said ‘ hmmm, I’m not buying this. I’m just not buying it.’

S – Yes, I know. Very few other people did. So, did you contact anyone? Did you speak to anyone? I don’t mean officially but in your own network of friends.

P – Yes.

S – And what were their thoughts.

P – Almost everybody was unanimous that it was a false flag.

S – And when did you start looking it up on the Internet – because I think people started posting immediately. You know, they were making YouTubes. The community began to express online. So when did you start looking into all of that?

P – We – a side note to this is that I have a lot of sources in and around and in that area. I have a lot of sources in regards to as to what’s going on with the president and the administration and so on, and every one of my sources said it was a false flag.

S – Now these are quasi-official… what kind of sources are these?

P – Let me say that there are the sources that are very close to this administration who knows what’s going on.

S – Really. So they are really like almost insiders then?

P – Oh yes.

S – And they all… they say it was a false flag because they figured it out like you did, or they had actually factual knowledge of such..

P – They had factual knowledge of such. That’s part of the plan.

S – I see. And so how much were they willing to tell you, and what else were they willing to tell you? Anything?

P – Oh, they told me quite a bit, and some of it I can’t reveal to you, but it fits the narrative of the anti-gun movement and the disarmament of America and that’s what the focus was.

S – And you realized that that’s part of the broader picture? That’s the Agenda 21 society?

P – Absolutely.

S – So do you want to tell us a little but about that or do you want to stick with the Sandy Hook material? I’ll let you decide.

P – Well, let’s go ahead with the Sandy Hook material and then we can jump into that.

S – OK, so we’re past Robbie Parker now, and what about the funerals? You must have known then that … Did you have any concept about victims or no victims, et cetera?

P – Well, that whole thing was pretty shaky. What was really starting to filter in in the system and was just confirming what I was already being told about these charity sites that had been developed. By the way, they were put up the day before the shooting. And I had gotten some screen shots, and I had confirmed with my sources. Some of them were thinking that it was a very sloppy operation actually.

But there were reassurances to me that there really were no victims and that everything’s being staged.

YouTube – Veterans Today –

And of course the funerals to me… you go and look at the whole funeral process. It looked like they were all staged, from the Robbie Parker one in Utah, or the Sarah Parker one with the Parker family.

And then I started getting information from people that actually had attended that funeral who lived in Utah and said that was something very funny about it.

S – Now I would like to ask you whether your sense is that these are real families even, or are they patched together?

P – Well, you know, that’s a good question because, you know, the thing that rolls around in my head, you know, the actors type of thing, you know. You know because you can put families together and these acting programs will do that under certain training scenarios. And so, it’s a good question. It really is a fair question to ask whether or not they were real families.

S – And then of course because they continue to speak and organize and be called upon to comment, they have to be formed into these family groupings over time. And remain grouped like that whether they are truly married or not.

You know, here’s one thing that I noticed. When you see a couple, if they seem really like an odd couple, then that kind of strikes you as weird. And I saw that. I saw a very odd coupled-ness with lots of these Sandy Hook families. It seemed to me, why would this person marry this person and live with them? They’re so totally different. That happens sometimes but in this content it really jumped out at me… myself anyway. I didn’t know if you noticed that…

P – It’ different to say, you know, when you saw them together whether they are natural families or not. That’s… I’m suspicious of that. And like I say, I’m suspicious because I know that you can put these families together, you know, with some of these acting companies out there. And that just kind of blends in with what I was already being suspicious about.

And so, there’s a lot of things that would go into the details of examining this. And I’ve see a lot of the pictures and so on, and some of the pictures don’t match up, especially the one of the Parkers in the White House. And it looks like to me that’s Sarah Parker sitting there that’s, you know, supposed to be a victim.

S – There’s no Sarah Parker…

P – Which one is it… maybe it’s not the Parker…

S – Oh, you mean with Obama…

P – Yes, right.

S – Emilie or Madeline …those are the two order sisters, and a lot of people felt that that was Emilie Parker leaning on Obama.

P – Yes, that was Emilie Parker…

YouTube – Veterans Today –

S – Have you seen the Super Bowl video?

P – Yes, I have seen that.

S – Well, there is a girl who looks a lot like an older Emilie Parker in that video. So if that was Emilie at the White House, or actually I think… I don’t know if it was at the White House… but with Obama, she couldn’t be six in one picture and then just a month or two later, twelve or thirteen.

P – Right.

S – That’s where we have to make a decision.

But what did you think of all the photographs of the children? Did you notice anything – the portraits that we were shown that these were the victims? Did you notice anything about those portraits?

P – No, other than some of the malformations of different parts of their bodies – seemed to be a pretty obvious thing.

The whole thing… when you take a look at the totality of this, in my opinion, it’s very sloppily done.

S – Why would it have been sloppily done though?

P – Well, you know, when… and again, it’s kind of like sometimes there’s order that comes out of chaos. And when you have these chaotic situations, people want to put things back together as best they possibly can to feel more comfortable or to recover from it. And I didn’t see any of that. I don’t know if that makes any sense to anybody. People don’t want to have that chaos. They want to heal. They want to come back together. They want to solve a problem so that they can move forward.

And that’s part of what happens when you do these drills is that you take a day or so and you talk about what happened so that you can improve upon and make it better. People do that naturally even when there’s chaos and there’s an emergency situation because they want to seek normalcy again.

I didn’t see the same kind of emotions, if you will, or the same kind of communications between parents, kids, that you would normally see in these situations. It just didn’t look…it looked phony to me.

S – So you mean the community itself, they did not try to repair in the organic way…?

P – I would say that is true, from the parents to the kids, to the entire community.

S – What do you think of this privacy issue that has been bandied about by the authorities, that all the privacy needs to be respected, and you can’t reveal this or that…?

P – That to me just adds more fuel to the fire because that’s not what you do in the normal situation of an incident command system. You get the facts out because you know oftentimes when you get the facts out, you’re also looking for criminal behavior, and the more information that you can get out that that’s way, the better.

And I’m certainly not buying the notion that the parents weren’t allowed to see the kids.

S – The bodies, identifying the…

P – I just…that to me… that should be a red flag to anybody who has looked in to Sandy Hook. The parents weren’t allowed to do that. What’s up with that?

YouTube – Veterans Today –

S – And what did you think of the coroner’s behavior at his press conference?

P – Well there’s many things about him. I just… I… first of all, I didn’t understand why all of a sudden there’s 26 bodies and then there’s no coroner or doctor who’s looked at the bodies and they’re declared dead. And then all of a sudden the coroner comes out and everybody says that there was an automatic gun or a handgun that was used, and the coroner, on his own, comes out and says ‘Oh no, that was an AR-15 that was used.’

So there’s a lot of confusion, you know, about that coroner, his report, his reporting out. Nothing seems very clear and concise to me. And you know I would argue that, you know, as I looked at him and watched what was going on, he seemed to be just answering question on the fly without a lot of knowledge behind the questions.

S – And this suggested to you that this was a sloppily created event?

P – Absolutely.

S – And would you say that that was because of the portent of the whole thing that they… there were people involved in this… let’s say Dr. Carver, the coroner, who had some idea, if it was a scripted event, it was going to go big, and really big? So do you think that the sloppiness of it was because in being organized, it’s very difficult to juggle how people are going to perform given that they know how big this thing could get?

P – Well, you know, what happens is that you… if you’re going to do these things and carry it through with the lie, everybody’s got to be telling the same lie at the same time all the time.

And I think with my judgments about the parents and the kids, and seeing them lie, I was seeing a big lie being perpetrated right in front of me because nothing seemed to be consistent. And like you said, which I thought was interesting, is that oftentimes the media would fill in a lot of the blanks for you.

A classic example of the blanks comes up when you talk about where are the kids that are evacuating the school. There were helicopters that were circling overhead. They certainly would have been able to show, you know, hundreds of kids exiting the school.
That was never shown. But you did see a picture out in a parking lot, which by the way if you take a long look at this picture of all these kids being led out, about 15 or 20 kids being led out by teachers and adults from this parking lot, if you take a look at the parking lot from the aerial views, you can see that there are different cars in the parking lot in that area. So obviously that was done during some sort of drill. That’s my opinion. And it didn’t match with what was going on at the time. So nothing is matching in real time for me. That’s just another thing.

But where are the kids? Where were the kids? They weren’t present. They just weren’t there. So that’s the kind of stuff that wasn’t worked out and, you know, they were doing things on the fly. That’s why I say… I would say it was very amateur, very amateurish as to what was going on.

S – Which is surprising because in the powers that would have designed this thing – that it would be so amateur – but…

You are familiar with the character, Gene Rosen?

P – Gene Rosen – which one was …?

YouTube – Veterans Today –

S – Gene Rosen was the man who was very close to the school and he took the kids in and offered them juice and cookies, and he gave many different… he recounted his rescuing or fielding these kids differently in many interviews. So can you comment on that?

P – I can comment on this because this points to this proves my point that these kids… did they get off a bus? Where did they go? OK, I think that one of the stories was that the kids got off the bus and they made their way to his house, and there was all this panic or whatever was going on. OK, there’s something really wrong with that picture to begin with.

First of all, when you’re doing these scenarios and this school had to have been trained for this because FEMA requires these trainings, and if you’re getting safety monies from the federal government, which every school does, they have to follow the proper protocols and that’s the proper release of the students to their parents.

S – Right. He said, that children showed up on his lawn and they were with a bus driver, in one story. In another story, they were just there by themselves and they were repeating babbling that there teacher was dead. So what…would the protocol be that the children…the children, according to the story, left the school on their own.

P – Well, that to me, that’s very suspicious in and of itself.

S – Right, I mean the cops had not gotten there in the first five minutes. Apparently some of them could still hear shooting going on, and how did the kids get out and just run down the road, you know?

P – All that seems to be… and again, I want to go into the thing about the incident command system, evacuation, walk-outs and so on. None of that fits that protocol. None of it.

The story of Gene Rosen or any of that stuff – None of that fits. That to me is just more evidence that there were no students other than the actor students that were there.

S – Then what was the purpose of having the Gene Rosen player?

P – Diversion.

S – From what?

P – A diversion from the other realities going on and to add more hype about the story. It’s the same thing about the guy that was chased through the woods. You know, they had a couple of guys that were chased through the woods. What were they all about?

YouTube – Veterans Today –

And there were no answers about any of that, about where they came from and even my people couldn’t come up with an answer about that. Some of my people say it was very sloppily done.

S – These are your insider people, right?

P – Right.

S – Now did you see any of the videos of the people circling through the firehouse?

P – Yes.

S – And did that strike you… what did you think of that?

P – Well, I had already come to my conclusion that this was a drill, and again, being very suspicious of the Obama administration, Diane Feinstein, Second Amendment issues, using Agenda 21 in particular, I had not see that for quite some time afterwards, maybe a couple of weeks after.

We were engaged in our own things that we were doing in terms of investigations and stuff like that. We’re pretty intense about what we’re doing here on Agenda 21 Radio, and we have some very highly placed sources of information that comes to us and which we’re very grateful for.

I, for one reason or another, hadn’t seen that video maybe two or three weeks until after the incident.

There’s more evidence right there because what in the world were all those people doing there to begin with? You see, if you’re doing an incident command situation, there’s a place for those people and those people can be moved on rather than seeing that circus that was going on, which is what that was. That was all staged.

S – Right. And these were far too many adults, no children whatsoever, no panic. And to me the people that were there-–they weren’t dressed for December. So some people have suggested that that particular drill, the circling in and out of the firehouse, took place a lot earlier, and it matches the time frame and the clothing of the children evacuated from the school. They did not have their coats.

And I was going to ask you, is it normal when there’s an emergency for the teacher to evacuate the children without letting them get their coats, or would they take the extra time and say ‘Children go put your coats on as fast as you can.’ How does that work?

P – Well no. If there’s a signal to get them out of the building – and there’s always a signal of some sort to get them out of the building safely – they go directly out. Period. End of subject

And if they can get their coat, that’s great, but the safety thing is to get them away from where there potentially is a threat and that would be the key thing. And again, you pointed to something else and I brought this up earlier about the drill that we used to run and people would always, you know, screw up the drill because they would knock on the door in an active shooter situation and the teacher would open the door.

Well, you know, how does that all play out? I was looking at things pretty much in real time within minutes of news being broadcast as it was happening from a helicopter. Now I am a real-time kind of guy. So I’m looking at maybe 15 minutes into the shooter, maybe 20 minutes into the shooter situation. I’m looking at clear video of the campus and so on. I’m not seeing anything happening.

Where are the kids? The kids aren’t there.

S – Right.

P – And they should be released or what’s going on with them?

S – And there were some people said that they were in closets for up to four hours. That doesn’t make any sense either.

P – That does not many any sense to me because what happens, and again it goes back to the police, and back to Columbine, they will go in and check every nook and cranny. And quite frankly, I know how that’s done. We used to do that. We always used to look and check to see where people were.

S – Right. And you would not miss large adults hiding in small closets.

And the idea of Katelyn Boyd and some of these teachers bundling up all their kids into the bathroom and having a few sit on the toilet… I even heard the toilet roll holder, my god, that’s pretty tough to do even for a six year old. But what do you think of that? That doesn’t make sense to me.

YouTube – Veterans Today –

Sofia Smallstorm, “Unraveling Sandy Hook in 2, 3, 4 and 5 dimensions”

P – Well, you know, we tell people in an active shooter situation to seek… to hide or… if there is a shooter there to take the challenge. We used to do these things where we had these dummy books and we’d bring in an active shooter as the stage person and throw books at them, you know, because that really throws them off. You’re taught those kinds of little techniques to throw the active shooter off.

But I can imagine some people getting holed up in a closet or something like that if they haven’t been able to lock the door. And that’s one of the things we tell our people all of the time. Lock the door. And we made sure in all schools, and all schools should have the, the doors should have the inside key on them, you know, so you can use an inside key on them also as we could on the outside.

S – So we have a couple of minutes left at this first hour. Do you have anything to say about Adam Lanza – fiction, non-fiction, real?

P – Well, just on the surface of it – and again I would throw out I’m highly specialized trained in drugs and alcohol recognition – obviously looks like he has some meds onboard just by the look. But you know if you couch that along the same lines that that this may be a fictional event, that he’s a fictional character, which fits his description of what I see there.

And of course if you’re doing a fictionalized event like this, you want to have the most crazed individual that you can have looking at you through the picture there, and that’s exactly what you have. That’s my speculation. I think that’s what they wanted. That’s what they did.

And he has a history and what is the history? We’re not real clear on the history. You know, first of all, they found out that he’s got his brother’s driver’s license. Then there’s some confusion. And you know it one of these kind of scenarios that just didn’t quite fit.

And as a school person that to me was one of the big pieces of evidence. Why does he have his brother’s license? And then they made contact his brother that I guess was in Jersey some place, wherever he was, and there was an investigation. That all seemed to be tracking with me as a distraction about what was really happening at the school.
Click here: “Conspiracy Analyst: Does Adam Lanza even exist?”

See, the more they under this situation… this is just my speculation – the more they could distract from the actual Sandy Hook school site itself and stage things away from there, the more they could sell the story of Sandy Hook on the whole.

S – That’s a very very good point, Paul. Excellent. And we should add that the mug shot that they gave us of Adam Lanza was very painterly. It wasn’t even a photo, and it did have that, you know, ghoulish expression on it to make us think this is a real lunatic.

But we are now at the end of our first hour and I really really thank you, Paul Preston, for being with us. And we will take up a second hour discussion in the Members Section. So this is Sofia Smallstorm thanking everyone for listening to this first hour and please do come to PureMomemtum.net and join us for the second hour in the Members Section with Paul Preston, 41 years in the public schools and someone who has been through a lot of staging of drills and has a lot of drill understanding and experience.

by Don Fox, Ian Greenhalgh and Jim Fetzer

Of all the positions that have been taken about 9/11, which range from the “official” collapse theory to the use of nanothermite to conventional explosives to DEWs, nukes mini or large, from a purely philosophical point of view, perhaps the most extreme is that adopted by Simon Shack (SS) and his followers, including onebornfree (obf), who claim that all the footage of the destruction sequence in New York City is fake and unreliable.

This is striking because that footage has virtually universally been regarded as some of the most important evidence about what actually happened there on 9/11.

Since the Twin Towers are shown blowing apart in every direction from the top down, for example, while being converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust, it serves as the foundation for one line of argument that demonstrated the “official” account cannot possibly be true, since the Twin Towers are not undergoing any kind of collapse.

If all of the videos had been faked, one might have expected they would show the towers collapsing, not blowing apart in every direction. And this is not the most bizarre of their positions.

Here is a sample of the kinds of visual studies that support the conversion of the towers into dust:

Simon Shack and onebornfree, alas, have never offered the least indication of what they think we should have seen, had we had access to authentic video footage. But there are many other kinds of evidence which goes far beyond the visual evidence they fixate upon:

(1) They were standing, then they were gone.

(2) It happened in a very brief period of time.

(3) Millions of cubic yards of dust emerged.

(4) They were destroyed below ground level.

(5) We have the so-called “toasted cars”

(6) And massive parts blown great distances

(7) There were videos and there were photos.

(8) There were many witnesses observing.

(9) We have cancer rates among responders.

(10) We have USGS dust samples.

(11) We have seismic readings.

(12) We have acoustical recordings.

The evidence derived from these sources can be used to sort out various alternative possibilities:

(h1) natural causes (earthquake, tornado,…)

(h2) collapse due to plane crashes and fires.

(h3) classic controlled demolitions (a pair).

(h4) non-conventional mode of destruction;

(h4a) lasers, masers or plasmoids;

(h4b) directed energy weaponry;

(h4c) nukes (large/small/micro/mini/)

So far the evidence most strongly supports (h4c), which we have explained repeatedly in a series of articles beginning with “9/11 Truth will out: The Vancouver Hearings II”. Clare Kuehn has offered a list of oddities that would almost certainly not have been present had all of the videos been faked or under control:

While Clues agrees that SS and obf have blundered on the destruction footage, she accents that the Clues andLetsRoll forums have exposed media control and some forms of fakery, for lack of a better term, including evidence of layering to conceal parts of images (for adding planes and in long shots) and the exensive interpolation of fake victims–including one head on up to eight different bodies.

The SS/obf Gambit

SS and obf do not discuss the evidence apart from the video footage and never address the question of why we cannot possibly know what happened on the basis of the totality of the evidence available for study. Instead, in response to the observation that the video footage is taken from many locations and perspectives, some from the air and some from across the Hudson River, where it all “hangs together” in the right way, they go on the attack, as in this post from obf attacking Jim Fetzer for making this argument:

1] there is never any need or requirement for the investigating “scientist” to ever closely scrutinize/compare even one of the 911 videos or photos, both with other 911 photos/videos, nor with pre-911 imagery, before accepting those videos/photos as indisputably genuine evidence.

2] there is never any need/requirement for the investigating “scientist” to ever try to authenticate even one of the alleged authors of any of the videos/photos before accepting their videos/photos as indisputably genuine evidence.

3] there is never any need/requirement for the investigating “scientist” to ever do extensive background checks on any/all alleged eyewitnesses and their out of court, not under oath testimony before accepting their testimony as indisputably genuine evidence.

The investigating “scientist” is perfectly free to claim anything that he/she feels is real is in fact real evidence, based on nothing more than personal bias/whim.

If, dear reader, any of the above 3 points even remotely apply within the general world of scientific research, [i.e. outside of 911 research] , and Mr Fetzer’s “scientific methodology” [ i.e. “if it looks good without closely checking/cross-checking then its genuine”], is simply par for the course, then I would suggest that the whole field of scientific research is in very, very deep trouble.

But this is a grossly exaggerated distortion of Jim’s actual position that is easier to attack, which makes it a nice example of the straw man fallacy. 1], 2] and 3] would appropriate if there were good reasons to doubt the photographic and video record. We know that to be the true in the case of the plane videos–and we have taken them apart. But obf and SS have really not given us any good reasons to doubt that the voluminous record of destruction videos and photos are fake.

There are too many from too many directions of enormous variation in quality, including of high definition, to take their claims seriously. At one point I looked at the wavy clouds of smoke with their repetition and changes in the background and color and tint variations, all of which appear to be post-production in messing with those photos and films–not necessarily for disinformational purposes, but because of multiple cases of copying and other sources of minor distortions.

They made valuable contributions exposing fakery in the airplane footage, but overgeneralized to conclude that all of the video footage had to be fake. So instead of contributing to SOLVING THE PROBLEM of what actually happened in New York City on 9/11, THEY DECLARE THE PROBLEM TO BE UNSOLVABLE. Here is some of the most fascinating footage that is incompatible with standard explosives or with any kind of collapse theory:

That is completely unscientific, where ofb’s complete lack of understanding of scientific method is no where more manifest than in his disregard for the rest of the evidence, which we enumerated as (1) through (12) above. Indeed, it is a basic principle of scientific reasoning that it be based upon all the evidence available. Failing to do so entails the commission of the fallacy of special pleading, which is common with politicians, editorial writers and used-car salesmen. That is where he stands.

That SS and obf even deny the existence of nuclear weapons tells me we are not dealing simply with persons of diminished capacity for serious research but demonstrable fakes and frauds. And while Clare will continue to treat them with kindness, it has become all too clear that they are shilling for Israel by doing their best to conceal that the towers were nukes and they must have been Israeli.

The US nuclear arsenal is under very tight but not perfect control, while Israeli nukes are not. Israel has not even admitted that it has a vast stockpile of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons–though it is common knowledge in the Middle East and among experts. SS and obf are using the pretense of science to attack those who are exposing the truth about 9/11, as Don Fox and Ian Greenhalgh explain in the study that follows.

By Don Fox and Ian Greenhalgh

“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” – Vladimir Lenin

Simon Shack, hoi.polloi, Ab Irato, El Buggo and Onebornfree are the latest disinfo crew to attempt to conceal the nuclear demolition of the World Trade Center buildings on 9/11 by any and all means necessary. Preceding them have been such luminaries of the “Truth Movement” as Steve Jones, Richard Gage, Christopher Bollyn, Mark Bilk, Judy Wood, Andrew Johnson, Thomas Potter, Emmanuel Goldstein, S. Tiller and Pete Santilli, among others.

A lot of effort has gone into constructing various ruses to fool the public. The Official Conspiracy Theory posits that 19 Islamic hijackers wielding box cutters were responsible for all of the destruction. The woefulness of that theory became readily apparent soon after 9/11 and it gave rise to a number of alternative theories.

The first to gain prominence was the pyrotechnic nanothermite promoted by Jones, Gage, Bilk and Bollyn among others. Alas non-explosive nanothermite has no explanatory power for what happened to the WTC buildings as has been previously documented. As the inadequacy of the nanothermite theory became apparent, Judy Wood’s directed energy weapon (DEW) non-theory started to gain prominence.

However, the indefensibility of the Judy Wood Cult’s non-theory pales in comparison to the utterly ludicrous rantings of the September Clues forum. Simon Shack and others have constructed an utterly bizarre 9/11 mythology which would have you believe that the Twin Towers were completely vacant after the 1993 bombing, that nobody died on 9/11 and that the entire event was a Hollywood-style production, where the actual destruction of the WTC buildings was obscured by military smoke-machines.

Completely Bizarre Scenario

According to posts on their forum, the Twin Towers were destroyed from the bottom up by conventional explosive charges. Nobody saw this as the television audience was shown fabricated movie footage prepared in advance of the event. A top-down, near free fall “collapse” of the Twin Towers is impossible to their minds, which means any and all videos and pictures depicting such occurrence have to be fake.

I have never seen a witness report the events as having happened that way. All of the witness reports I have read depict the events as having happened as the available videos and pictures show it. There is a huge gap between the September Clues version of 9/11 and the version that the rest of the world accepts. Here is a summation of the September Clues Forum’s positions:

It is fair to say the September Clues research has established these 4 main points:

1- The 9/11 imagery was nothing but a Hollywood-style film production, complete with actors in the role of ‘eye-witnesses’ or ‘firefighters’, staged ‘running crowds’, 3D-compositing and special cinematic effects. The ’9/11 movie’ was split into a number of short clips and sold to the TV audience as ‘newscasts’. The few clips featuring ‘airplanes’ (or dull silhouettes thereof) were computer-generated images – all of which in stark conflict with each other, as now comprehensively demonstrated in every imaginable manner, angle and method.

2- No commercial airliners were hijacked or – much less – crashed into the WTC towers, the Pentagon or the Shanksville field. No valid/verifiable records exist for : their airport logs/schedules, their numbered parts, their alleged passengers. Their reported speeds at near sea-level as well as the absurd visuals of their total, effortless disappearance into the WTC façades defy the laws of mechanics and physics – and the absence of visible wake vortexes in the WTC impact imagery also defies the laws of aerodynamics.

3- The World Trade Center Complex (9 buildings in all) were demolished with powerful explosives. No image-analyses of the tower collapses can help determine just what type of explosives were employed – since the videos are 3D animations and do not represent the real-life events. In reality, as they collapsed, the WTC complex was most likely enveloped by military-grade smoke obscurants. No real/private imagery exists of the morning’s events – ‘thanks’ to electromagnetic countermeasures.

4- No “3000″ people were trapped in the top floors/nor perished in the WTC towers. Only one thing was more important to the perps than avoiding a mass murder of 3000 US citizens : to sell the notion that “bogeyman Bin Laden” killed 3000 US citizens. We have renamed the ‘victims’ of these psy-operations “VICSIMS” (SIMulated VICtims). In fact, our research has seen the same pattern emerge in all the so-called “Al-Qaeda Terror Attacks” around the world (LONDON 7/7, MADRID 11, BALI, MUMBAI, etc…). In all logic, the very last aggravation the plotters behind these false-flag operations wish to have, are scores of real families hounding them forever with real questions and real class actions. Hence: NO real terror victims = Logical PsyOp rationale.

9/11 is but a giant – and still ongoing – money-making scam. It rotates around the most well-funded and profitable hoax of modern history. Everyone involved in the scheme is reaping a sizable return from their ‘investment bond’ which, naturally, has “SILENCE” printed all over it. For anyone to ‘speak out’ would be both ruinous and suicidal – a most distasteful option. To be sure, ‘suicidal heroics’ only exist in journalistic fairy-tales such as the outlandish news media’s narrative of 9/11 and its “nineteen religious fanatics”. The skeptics objecting that “too many people would have had to be in on this” fail to account for the most fundamental aspect of human nature: our survival instinct.

The master plan of 9/11 was to demolish the redundant, asbestos-filled WTC complex in Lower Manhattan – 9 buildings in all. The area would naturally be evacuated (as for all such demolitions) in order to prevent a slaughterhouse of dreadful proportions – not a good idea at all. To be sure, this was no mass murder scheme – just a formidable opportunity for massive financial gains and military propaganda. The military (and its various intelligence affiliates) would manage the ground logistics, such as securing the area, raising smokescreens to hide the proceedings from public view, and last but not least, electromagnetic countermeasures to keep any private cameras from filming the mayhem. The WTC complex was thus ‘safely’ destroyed in bright daylight. It was a magician’s trick, pulled off by sleight of hand to fool the few (the NY onlookers) – and with computer graphics to fool the world (the TV viewers).

Nobody died? The real destruction of the WTC buildings was somehow hidden from view? So what gives? Either September Clues knows something that the rest of us do not or they are completely out to lunch.

A cursory examination of their forum leads one to believe that the later has a much higher probability of being true than the former. For instance there is an entire thread devoted to proving that satellites are fake. During an interview with Ab Irato on 28 December 2013, for example, Simon Shack denies Earth-orbiting satellites exist:

Breaking News: Satellites DO Exist

Flat Earthers don’t believe in satellites as the existence of satellites can be used to disprove that the earth is flat. Satellites can take pictures of a round earth and Flat Earthers don’t like to see them. For Flat Earthers, those pictures are fabricated. Geostationary satellites are even worse. In order for an object to be geostationary, the object must orbit around the earth at the same angular velocity as earth’s rotation and at a certain altitude above the equator such that the centrifugal force due to the orbital movement is equal to the gravitational force.

Flat Earthers say GPS works based on LORAN (LOng RAnge Navigation), a terrestrial radio navigation system. Radio can travel long distance in the Flat Earth model because the earth is flat. Flat Earthers also say that satellite TV works based on transmission towers. Dishes don’t get signal from a geostationary satellite but rather from a very tall tower somewhere.

But how tall can these towers be? And where are they exactly located? Before answering my questions, I will show you some pictures taken in some places near the equator for you to ponder.

Everyone who lives where I come from is used to this kind of scenery. We all believe that satellites do exist since birth because the proof is everywhere around us. So yes we are all born Round Earthers.

The Flat Earth Model

Modern hypotheses supporting a flat Earth originated with English inventor Samuel Rowbotham (1816–1884). Based on his incorrect interpretation of experiments on the Bedford Level, Rowbotham published a 16-page pamphlet, called “Zetetic Astronomy”, which he later expanded into a 430-page book, Earth Not a Globe, expounding his views. According to Rowbotham’s system, the earth is a flat disc centered at the North Pole and bounded along its southern edge by a wall of ice (Antarctica), with the sun and moon 3,000 miles (4,800 km) and the “cosmos” 3,100 miles (5,000 km) above earth. He also published a leaflet entitled “The inconsistency of Modern Astronomy and its Opposition to the Scriptures!!” which argued that the “Bible, alongside our senses, supported the idea that the earth was flat and immovable and this essential truth should not be set aside for a system based solely on human conjecture.”

One of the many problems with the Flat Earth Model is the Earth rotates on its axis and has a Northern and Southern Hemisphere. The Earth tilts on its axis and this is what gives us the four different seasons. How does a Flat Earth person account for the four seasons? Why do hurricanes spin counter-clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere and typhoons spin clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere?

This Just In: Earth is ROUND

The actual shape of the Earth is actually an oblate spheroid – a sphere with a bulge around the equator. The Earth is bulged at its equator because it’s rapidly rotating on its axis. The centripetal force of the rotation causes the regions at the equator to bulge outward. And it actually makes a pretty big difference. The diameter of the Earth, measured across the equator is 43 km more than when you measure the diameter of the Earth from pole to pole.

This bulge has some interesting implications. For example, it means that the point on Earth furthest from the center isn’t actually Mount Everest, but Mount Chimborazo in Ecuador. Only because Chimborazo is closer to the Earth’s equator.

Human Remains Found at Ground Zero

Jim Riches pulled his firefighter son’s mangled body out of the rubble at the World Trade Center, but the phone calls still filtered in years afterward. The city kept finding more pieces of his son.

“They’ll call you and they’ll tell you, ‘We found a shin bone,’” said Riches, a retired deputy fire chief. “Or: ‘We found an arm bone.’ We held them all together and then we put them in the cemetery.”

Those are the phone calls both dreaded and hoped for among the families of Sept. 11 victims. And as investigators began sifting through newly uncovered debris from the World Trade Center this week for the first time in three years, those anxieties were renewed more than a decade after the attacks.

But there was also hope that more victims might yet be identified after tens of millions have been spent on the painstaking identification process. Two potential human remains were recovered on Monday, according to the medical examiner.

“We would like to see the other 40 percent of the families who have never recovered anything to at least someday have a piece of their loved one,” Riches said. “That they can go to a cemetery and pray.”

About 60 truckloads of debris that could contain tiny fragments of bone or tissue were unearthed by construction crews that have been working on the new World Trade Center in recent years. That material is now being transported to a park built on top of the former Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island, where investigators will attempt to find any possible remains during the next 10 weeks, the city said. That’s the material the two potential human remains were found in.

Some 2,750 people died at the World Trade Center in the 2001 terrorist attacks, but only 1,634 people have been identified.

“We have been monitoring the World Trade Center site over time and monitoring the construction,” said Ellen Borakove, a spokeswoman for the medical examiner’s office. “And if they see any material that could possibly contain human remains, we collect that material.”

About 9,000 human remains recovered from the ruins of the World Trade Center remain unidentified because they are too degraded to match victims by DNA identification. The remains are stored at an undisclosed location monitored by the medical examiner’s office and will eventually be transferred to a subterranean chamber at the National September 11 Memorial & Museum.

If nobody died why was so much money paid out to the families?

Paying Off the Victims: September 11th Victim Compensation Fund

Just eleven days after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Congress created the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. It was a unique, unprecedented commitment to compensate families who lost a loved one on 9/11 and survivors who were physically injured. In its haste, Congress provided very few guidelines as to how the funds should be distributed and set no limit on the size of awards. Instead, it gave a single individual nearly unlimited discretion to manage the program.

Attorney General John Ashcroft appointed Kenneth Feinberg to administer the fund, handing him sole responsibility for calculating the dollar value of over 5,500 dead and injured in the worst peacetime disaster in U.S. History. In this he was supported by some 30 lawyers from his law firm and his wife, Diane “Dede” Shaff Feinberg.

Kenneth Feinberg: The Zionist Hush Money Specialist

Kenneth Feinberg is a Jewish lawyer known for wearing expensive Brioni suits, smoking Cuban cigars and his love of opera. He has become (in)famous for his handling of many high-profile litigations. A partial list of cases in which Feinberg has handled settlement payments:

With a resume like that, it would appear that Kenneth Feinberg is the man the Zionists turn to whenever they need to cover something up and distribute hush money in the form of compensation.

For three years working pro bono as head of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, Feinberg reached out to all who qualified to file a claim, evaluated applications, determined appropriate compensation and distributed awards. Feinberg spent almost all of his time meeting with the 9/11 families, convincing them of the generosity and compassion of the program and calculating appropriate awards for each and every claim. He personally took part in most of the 1,500 hearings with survivors and victims’ families and his staff of 200 spent 33 months investigating claims and deciding benefits. Feinberg told ABC News on Dec. 19, 2003:

“It’s a brutal, sort of cold thing to do. Anybody who looks at this program and expects that by cutting a U.S. Treasury check you are going to make 9/11 families happy is vastly misunderstanding what’s going on with this program.”

When the program was launched, many families criticized it as a brazen, tight-fisted attempt to protect the airlines from lawsuits. The Fund was also attacked as attempting to put insulting dollar values on the lives of lost loved ones. Those who participated in the Fund were required to waive their right to sue the airlines involved in the attacks, as well as other potentially responsible entities including the Israeli airport security firm Huntleigh USA/ICTS. By taking the compensation, the families waived their right to demand a real investigation into 9/11.

More than 98 percent of the families accepted the money from the Feinberg-managed fund. The amounts of the payments and the amounts paid to Diane Feinberg and the 30 lawyers are not known. The American people deserve to know how the funds were used and who got paid.

Estimates put the total settlement amount at less than $3.5 billion total for all the victims. Due to the lack of oversight, it’s anyone’s guess where the rest of the tax dollars have gone. Ellen Mariani, a brave and fiery widow and 9/11 plaintiff, included Feinberg in her lawsuit which was eventually forcibly settled. Feinberg’s inclusion in the suit was partially related to his success in bribing Mariani’s attorney to try to coerce his client to accept the fund’s payout and attempt to convince her that she was clinically insane.

Feinberg’s role in covering up the truth about 9/11 is connected to his relationship to the state of Israel. A year after the settlement of the 9/11 claims he went to Israel at the behest of the Sharon government to work on compensating the 8,000 settlers they were trying to force out of Gaza. Kenneth Feinberg wasn’t working pro bono on the 9/11 victims fund out of compassion for the victims of 9/11, or for America. He was doing it to serve Israel and the murderous Mossad.

Diane ‘Dede’ Shaff Feinberg and the Jewish Agency

Diane and Kenneth Feinberg were co-chairmen of the recent General Assembly of the Jewish Federation, which hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, two prime suspects in the Israeli terrorism of 9/11.

Diane is also an executive member of the United Israel Appeal and the Jewish Federation of Washington. She also happens to be a member of the Board of Governors of the Jewish Agency – the parent organization of the Mossad.

To understand why American Jews are willing to commit and cover-up serious crimes, even treason, on behalf of the state of Israel one needs to understand that most religious Jews in America are first obliged to serve Israel – a foreign state. American Jews are, for this reason, conflicted. Their religion obliges them to make “aliya” and live in Israel but most would prefer to stay in the United States. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis have chosen to leave “the Jewish state” and now live in the United States. While they are unwilling to leave the comfort of the United States and immigrate to Israel (aliya), most religious Jews in the United States feel strongly compelled to support and defend the state of Israel.

To fulfill their obligation to the state of Israel, Zionist Jews in America have created hundreds of organizations to raise funds and support for the Zionist state in Palestine. These organizations are consolidated under an umbrella organization called the Jewish Agency. The Jewish Agency and the World Zionist Organization are two parts of the same Zionist enterprise that operates in the United States and around the world. The Jewish Agency was the Zionist organization that became the state of Israel in 1948 when a Jewish state was established in Palestine. The Jewish Agency, then headed by David Ben-Gurion, literally became the apparatus of the Zionist state and Ben-Gurion became the first prime minister of Israel.

The Jewish Agency, head quartered in New York City after World War II, organized and funded the Haganah, the Zionist militia in Palestine, as well as the terrorist groups known as the Irgun and LEHI (the Stern Gang). Using these groups, the Jewish Agency created the Mossad Le Aliyah Bet (the Agency for Illegal Immigration) in 1938 to smuggle illegal Jewish immigrants and weapons into Palestine. The Jewish Agency and the Mossad worked together to bring many thousands of Jews to Palestine – illegally – from Yemen, Iraq, Egypt, and Europe. The Jewish Agency was the Mossad.

The Jewish Agency and the Mossad continued to work together after the creation of the state of Israel to bring Jews to the Zionist state. The hardline Zionists who run Israel today are actually fighting a losing battle with demographics. The Arab population around them is growing quickly while many Israelis are leaving the Jewish state. The Israeli population has become more Russian, more extremist, and less Western in its outlook than at any time since the founding of the state in 1948. Ariel Sharon, the now comatose prime minister who ran Israel in 2001, dreamed of bringing one million Jews to Israel from the United States. In this effort he worked closely with the Jewish Agency.

Alvin K. Hellerstein: U.S. Judge but Zionist gatekeeper

Feinberg’s actions were crucial to removing more than 98 percent of the families from the litigation process. Kenneth Feinberg and Judge Alvin Hellerstein have waged a war of attrition against the 9/11 relatives. Of the thousands of families that could have used the courts to find justice and legal discovery for what happened on 9-11, Feinberg was successful in removing 98 percent. Of the 96 families that chose to go to court, all but one or two cases have settled out of court after enduring years of obstruction in the court of Alvin K. Hellerstein. Thanks to Feinberg and Hellerstein there may never be a trial for a single victim of 9-11.

For the 96 families who initially chose to forgo the fund in favor of a transparent trial, Sheila Birnbaum was appointed special mediator between Hellerstein and the victims’ families. Birnbaum, another dedicated Zionist lawyer at the Israeli law firm Skadden Arps, effectively railroaded these brave families and forced them all to settle. Skadden Arps introduces itself with the following on its website:

“Many of our attorneys are thoroughly familiar with the legal structure, business environment and political system of Israel, and several (including at the partner level) are Israeli-born, native Hebrew speakers who have been admitted to the bars of both Israel and New York. A number of our lawyers volunteer a significant amount of their time to Jewish and Israeli causes, including the America-Israel Friendship League, the Anti-Defamation League, the College of Management, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Elem, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, The Jerusalem Foundation and Miklat.”

Radical Zionist Alvin Hellerstein has controlled all 9/11 litigation. Hellerstein, Feinberg and Birnbaum were the triumvirate that formed the Zionist roadblock to any justice for the victims’ families. Hellerstein’s son, Joseph, worked for the law firm that represented ICTS, the Israeli passenger screening and security company implicated in 9/11. Hellerstein is thus guilty of a criminal conflict of interest in his prevention of a trial in any 9/11 lawsuit.

Alvin Hellerstein is tied to 9/11 directly in his role as head gatekeeper on all 9/11 claims, preventing legal discovery, wrongful death and personal injury lawsuits from trial. Judge Hellerstein is also intimately connected to other key Israeli players of the 9/11 massacre on multiple layers through his son, Joseph. Joseph Hellerstein worked for an Israeli law firm, Amit, Pollack and Matalon, which represented ICTS, the Israeli firm implicated in the attacks via passenger screening and airline security at Newark, Boston Logan, and Dulles, the departure sites of the hijacked aircraft.

ICTS is owned by two Israelis, Ezra Harel and Menachem Atzmon. Atzmon was convicted in Israel of fraud with partner and mayor of Jerusalem, Ehud Olmert. Olmert later became prime minister of Israel. Olmert incidentally also made a secret trip to meet with then mayor of NYC, Rudy Giuliani on the eve of 9/11, ostensibly to oversee their plot. He and other Israeli officials were allowed to leave the US aboard an El Al plane when all other planes were grounded on 9/11. ICTS was also implicated in the 7/7 bombings in London.

Hellerstein recently effectively blocked the last victim’s family, the Bavises, from ever having a day of trial against the government and airport security, forcing them to settle out of court after a decade of his dedicated gatekeeping. His callous quote to the 96 families of victims of 9/11 will live in infamy:

“We have to get past 9/11. Let it go. Life is beautiful. Life is short. Live out your years. Take the award.”

Both father and son Hellerstein also worked for Stroock, Stroock, and Lavan, a Rothschild funded law firm which, incidentally, represented Larry Silverstein in his bid to lease the towers. How many conflicts of interests can you count?

The Origins of “September Clues”

Around the beginning of June 2007, a new video – called “September Clues” appeared. It presented an analysis of the events as they were shown on TV on 9/11/2001. It tried to present the evidence that some of the images we were shown of the events could not have been real. The person who had produced/edited this video used the pseudonym “Social Service” and he seemed to be associated with a band of the same name.

Over the next few months “Social Service” released several updates to September clues and it finally ended up as 8 ten-minute segments and a couple of additional “epilogue” videos. Around this time, it was revealed that Social Service’s name was “Simon Shack”.

In July or August 2008, on a forum, Simon Shack made a request for some web storage space for his videos. A man called Andrew Johnson offered some of the space to Simon Shack to store his video files etc., and also purchased a domain name for Simon Shack www.septclues.com. A year later when the subscription to that web space expired, Johnson and Shack began to have a series of increasingly serious disagreements, with the bulk of the animosity emanating from the Shack side.

Who precisely is Simon Shack?

As it turns out, Simon Shack is actually a Pseudonym. Simon Shack’s real name is Simon Hytten, which he disclosed on his forum in March 2011. Simon gave this explanation for his adoption of the Shack pseudonym:

“My surname Shack was coined back in 1993 or so by a black, Colorado-born jazz musician named Fontaine Burnette. Try and contact him and ask him about it (I haven’t heard from him in many years). He asked me what Hytten meant – so I told him it means a little house/or hut. So he just quipped… “Like a shack?” – and I said yeah, a bit like a shack. That’s all there is to it. I liked it. So then, as I registered at the STIM (the Swedish Musician’s Union) I was told that my artist name would be accepted – even at legal/bureaucratic levels. So that’s how I signed in at STIM. Ever since, I have used this surname – and all music reviews/articles written about me/my band (The Social Service) as a musician, have had me as Simon Shack. It simply stuck on me – and most people now know me by that name. I certainly had no motive to change my surname back in 1993 – in order to hide from something! At the time, I had no clue whatsoever of how this crazy world is rolling!“

Early years in Sicily – disrupting Danilo Dolci’s anti-Mafia crusade

Simon Hytten was born in Stockholm, Sweden from a Norwegian father and a Swedish mother. Simon grew up in Sicily with two brothers and his parents who were part of a ‘workshop’ run by Danilo Dolci in a small town near Palermo called Partinico.

Danilo Dolci was an anti-mafia crusader and it appears that Simon’s father, Eyvind Hytten was sent to infiltrate and disrupt Dolci’s work. In 1967, Dolci held a press conference where he accused prominent members of the government, by name, of collusion with the Mafia. Sometime after this, Eyvind Hytten split from Dolci and planned to establish an institute in Palermo to train development workers. Hytten was quoted as saying:

“We did not want to be instruments for maintaining Dolci’s fame. We wanted his fame to be an instrument for our work for Sicilians. I think that we, more than Dolci, now represent the possibility of doing something for Sicily.”

However, the motives for Hytten’s work were questioned by the Swedish committee who had originally sponsored his work with Dolci; they stated in a press release:

“We deplore the manner in which Hytten has publicly taken a stand against Dolci. We will in no way participate in Hytten’s plans, but will continue to support Danilo Dolci in his tireless campaign to release Sicily from the grip of poverty and a powerful Mafia.”

The Swedish group also announced it was fully washing it hands of Hytten and sharply criticized the newspapers who had given the false impression that Hytten had become Dolci’s legitimate successor in Sicily. Sadly, Hytten’s nefarious work had its desired effect, as noted on Dolci’s Wikipedia page:

“The smears certainly succeeded in pushing Dolci out of the limelight in Italy – for the last 20 years of his life he disappeared from public view.”

So it appears that Eyvind Hytten was controlled opposition sent in to disrupt and destroy Dolci’s anti-mafia organization, sadly he succeeded. Simon Hytten tried to shift the blame onto American writer Jerre Mangione, author of the book ‘The World around Danilo Dolci’

“So what exactly do you think this former Syracuse graduate/Time Magazine/Department Of Justice employee was doing in Sicily interviewing a groundbreaking, upcoming yet “inconvenient”(for the world elite) anti-mafia activist like Danilo Dolci? Was he not there perhaps – just perhaps – to give a bad name to the whole community, and to point out/inflate the workshop’s inevitable, petty squabbles? To be sure, this is what transpires when you scour the chapters of his book”

Geneva and the Bin Ladins

Here is an audio clip in which Simon admits that he put the Bin Ladin stickers on the car:

After their work was done in Sicily, the family moved to Geneva, Switzerland where Eyvind took up employment with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

During this time in Geneva, Simon’s elder brother Mario began a career as a racing driver, he competed for 3 seasons 1982-84 in the Marlboro British Formula 3 Championship before competing in the FIA Formula 3000 Int. Championship for four seasons 1985-88. Mario didn’t have much success, winning only one race and claiming eight podium positions from over 70 starts. He had a handful of races in sports car formulae 1989-92 before retiring in 1993. Nowadays, he lives in Sweden and works as a manager and translator.

During his career, Mario was sponsored by the “Bin Ladin Group.” Apparently, Mario befriended Yeslam Bin Ladin, an entrepreneur and half-brother of Osama Bin Laden. Yeslam is a fully Westernized man, possesses a degree in Economics, speaks four languages fluently, owns several successful businesses and became a naturalized Swiss citizen in 2001.

Yeslam became interested in helping Mario in early 1986. As he was quite influential in Arab elite, the brother of Osama managed to recruit a number of sponsors of the Middle East to support Mario in Formula 3000. The main sponsor was Yeslam’s family company, the Bin Ladin Group and this can be seen from photos of Mario’s F3000 car where the Bin Ladin Group is advertised on the rear wing.

Simon tried to explain this connection on his forum:

“I must say that Mario did well for himself in finding wealthy sponsors to forward his car racing career. He was a relentless sponsorship hunter and, at some stage, got to meet Yeslam Bin Ladin in his London office. Yeslam gave him some cash to promote his construction company”

Regardless of the truth of the actual relationship, it is clear that Simon Shack aka Simon Hytten, was, for at least a few years in the 1980s, one person removed from the Bin Ladin family.

Apparently, there is little love lost today between Simon and his two elder brothers, as Simon wrote in an internet post:

“[A] few lines about my estranged brothers, Nicolai and Mario. They have inexplicably grown into two abject human beings – and I have almost no words to qualify their current behavior.”

Simon describes Nicolai and Mario as ‘two despicable creatures’ and states that “my disdain for them is immense.”

Kevin hosts “Truth Jihad Radio” as well as co-hosting “Dynamic Duo Weekly News”, so it is not surprising that he might occasionally lose track.

The hype about Robert Gates’ forthcoming book as containing “explosive information” about Barack Obama and his administration appears to be grossly exaggerated.

He even describes Obama’s decision to raid the compound in Pakistan in pursuit of a man who died on 15 December 2001 as “one of the most courageous ever made by a White House”, which is simply more propaganda to bolster another example of big lies to the American public to promote a political agenda.

But the State of Connecticut, shamefully, appears to be doing its best to compete, where a group of scholars (including three Ph.D.s) has exposed the Sandy Hook hoax more thoroughly and in greater detail than ever before. Their “Top Ten Reasons: Sandy Hook was an Elaborate Hoax” deserves to be widely read.

A federal judge in New York has approved that state’s ban on assault weapons even as he rejected the ban on clips holding more than seven rounds, where these gun control measures appear to many Americans to be un-Constitutional on their face. It remains to be seen what the reaction of public will be to the dawning realization that they are being promoted on the basis of what now appears to be a fabricated event at Sandy Hook during which no one died.

The former Detroit Chief of Police has even come around to endorse the right of Americans to Indeed, the legacy of anti-Americanism that Americans have inherited from the deceit and deception of the Bush/Cheney administration on the basis of the false-flag attack of 9/11, which was blamed on Arab fanatics but appears to have been carried out by neo-cons in the Department of Defense and their allies in the Mossad, has done enormous not only to those lost in combat and to the national treasury but, as in the past, the US has done immense damage to the countries we have unjustly invaded.

Search

Search for:

Archives

Archives

Stew Webb 34 Years a Federal Whistle blower
Stew Webb served in the United States Marine Corps and was Honorable Discharge. Stew was a General Contractor-Home Builder until 3 car crashes in one year and is now disabled. Stew turned Federal Whistle blower – Activist of 31 years and has been a guest on over 3,000 Radio and TV Programs since September 18, 1991 and now has his own Radio and TV Network http://www.stewwebb.com Stew was responsible for the Congressional Investigations and hearings that lead to the Appointment of Independent Prosecutor Arlin Adams in the 1989 HUD Hearings, the Silverado Savings and Loan Hearings, the Denver International Airport Frauds hearings, the MDC Holdings, Inc. (MDC-NYSE) Illegal Political Campaign Money Laundering Colorado’s biggest case aka Keating 5 hearings and the information provided that lead to the 2008 Illegal Bank Bailout.
Stew was held as a Political Prisoner from 1992-1993 to silence his exposure by Leonard Millman his former in law with illegal charges of threatening harassing telephone calls charges which were dismissed with prejudice. Leonard Millman, George HW Bush, George W Bush, Jeb Bush, Neil Bush, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Larry Mizel, Phil Winn, Norman Brownstein, John McCain and Mitt Romney to name a few are all partners in what is known as the Bush-Millman-Clinton Organized Crime Syndicate. Leonard Millman (Deceased 2004) was member of the “Illuminati Council of 13”

Fair Use Notice
§ 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use40 Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phone records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include — (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.